I was charged with being late on guard by the WO2 orderly officer at SEE in 1974.
I wasn't he held the guard mounting 10 minutes early as wanted elsewhere and everybody else was already there.
I was told to be in front of the CSM at Naafi Break and to bring someone as my escort so I grabbed my mate who was sitting next to me in class. Duties were generally assigned by class so he had been present.
I was a sprog, the Army was too good for me to care about a minor fine so I went with the flow....................
that is right up to sentencing when my escort blurts out what really happened.
CSM accused us both of rehearsing the case which we both denied whilst I secretly thought my mate was an idiot.
A bit of harrumphing and I was admonished whilst the WO2 was told to remain behind.@Stonker whilst I have some laughable memories of the RMP my overwhelming sense of them was professional competence and humour. Mostly where they screwed up was where they were sprogs.

LE

Agreed but I guess it was utilising what was available given the context and situation.

It is my Royal and Imperial Command that you concentrate your energies, for the immediate present upon one single purpose, and that is that you address all your skill and all the valour of my soldiers, to exterminate first, the treacherous English, walk over General Frenchs contemptible little Army. Kaiser Wilhlem II, 19 Aug 14 (allegedly!)

Back in the day you could only ever transfer in from elsewhere within the Army.

In my time I always found that people who came in from elsewhere in the Army had a bit more about them; taking nothing away from those who came in from the ACIOs, a lot of them in their first few years just lacked overall military experience, especially when dealing with experienced people from other cap badges. It's all about credibility, I think.

It is my Royal and Imperial Command that you concentrate your energies, for the immediate present upon one single purpose, and that is that you address all your skill and all the valour of my soldiers, to exterminate first, the treacherous English, walk over General Frenchs contemptible little Army. Kaiser Wilhlem II, 19 Aug 14 (allegedly!)

LE

'Staff Sergeant Davies commanded 3 Platoon, 203 Provost Company which was under tactical command of HQ 7 Armoured Brigade for Operation Granby. His duties required him to move early through the obstacle breach in wheeled vehicles, alongside the armoured reconnaissance, in order to lay out the Brigade rendezvous line on the far side of the breach, and establish the Forming Up Point (FUP) for the Brigade Administrative Area (BAA). Thereafter, he would be responsible for signing the axis of advance so that the BAA could follow hard up on the Brigade in order to provide logistic support.

'On 25 February 1991, early Allied successes had advanced timings for the Brigade's passage of lines, and the forward elements were already some four hours ahead of the BAA by the time the FUP was reached. Best speed was therefore required if the BAA was to provide close logistic support to the Brigade and, in turn, receive protection on the battlefield.

'The FUP proved, on occupation, to be covered in Multi Launch Rocket System bomblets to the extent that the BAA group sustained three wounded and one killed within a short time of arriving in the area. Staff Sergeant Davies's platoon itself had already lost one Landrover and a motorcycle due to this hazard. With the onset of darkness and with rain and cloud making visibility almost nil, Staff Sergeant Davies was ordered by the Brigade Provost Officer to clear safe lanes, to allow the BAA to form up and pass through the FUP. The alternative was clearly the loss of critical logistic vehicles and possibly more lives. He, therefore, personally led his soldiers in clearing the necessary routes of bomblets—in full knowledge of their potential lethality—using issue shovels.

'Despite an explosion early in the proceedings, which fortunately inflicted no injury, Staff Sergeant Davies continued to work against the clock to clear the way for the 600 plus vehicles of the BAA. In due course, the BAA was able to occupy its FUP and proceed up the line of advance with minimum delay. Staff Sergeant Davies continued to recce and lay the route for the BAA through the next 200 kilometres of enemy territory, throughout motivating an increasingly tired and stressed platoon through many battlefield hazards.

'Staff Sergeant Davies's act was one of exemplary personal courage and robust leadership.'

I remember him being interviewed after the award was announced and my very distant memory of it is that he said that he was handed an envelope with his name and DCM written on it. His first thought was "District Court Martial".

LE

I remember him being interviewed after the award was announced and my very distant memory of it is that he said that he was handed an envelope with his name and DCM written on it. His first thought was "District Court Martial".

It is my Royal and Imperial Command that you concentrate your energies, for the immediate present upon one single purpose, and that is that you address all your skill and all the valour of my soldiers, to exterminate first, the treacherous English, walk over General Frenchs contemptible little Army. Kaiser Wilhlem II, 19 Aug 14 (allegedly!)

ADC

Whilst instructing at the Guards Depot I walked on the grass outside of Company HQ. I was spotted doing so by the CSM, a particularly spiteful individual, who put me "On report" as it was in those days.

Come the day I was marched in and halted, turned to the left, and on hearing my name read stepped forward and saluted at the same time. The CSM then read the charge and proceeded to give his evidence. Pregnant pause and then from the Company Commander a plaintive "It's a bit petty isn't it CSM" I cringed inside realising that I had got off at the expense of making the CSM look foolish.

Being "Put on report" is correct and not just for Woodentops. ORs can't charge soldiers, but report them to the authorities usually officers, who can actually frame the charge. The theory is this is where the "petty" stuff is weeded, but you and I know that that just ain't the case!

When you were tabbed in on a charge, i.e. walking in God's grass, why did you salute, you would have been hat and beltless when awaiting the "Award". Why hatless and beltless? - to stop the soldier assaulting the officer in the days when headdress and belts were substantial bits of kit.

Labour: For the Few, NOT the Many!
Tory: Vote for us we can ignore you better than Labour do.
I
I'm a Gammon and proud of it!

In reverse: admonishment (i.e. A warning to future conduct) is a low punishment after a finding of the charge(s) proven. Bit like a magistrate’s court finding you guilty but giving you an absolute discharge.
Some offences dealt with under SL are recordable as they have a direct equivalence in E&W law, eg theft, drugs possession, battery.
The MSL also lists some that are deemed recordable on top of these.

LE

Being "Put on report" is correct and not just for Woodentops. ORs can't charge soldiers, but report them to the authorities usually officers, who can actually frame the charge. The theory is this is where the "petty" stuff is weeded, but you and I know that that just ain't the case!

When you were tabbed in on a charge, i.e. walking in God's grass, why did you salute, you would have been hat and beltless when awaiting the "Award". Why hatless and beltless? - to stop the soldier assaulting the officer in the days when headdress and belts were substantial bits of kit.

I was also advised that as the individual holding the orders should ensure that their desk was clear, of any objects at all, again to ensure no weapons were available to the accused.

I also believe that if you have the responsibility of judging someone you should be doing just that, no extraneous objects/files/pictures of your family etc should distract you from your duty. The accused should see that you are taking the process seriously as the outcome of the proceedings is going to have most affect upon them.

LE

Indeed, I was also reading discussion on this in the HoC where it was acknowledged that technically misconduct towards an Officer could mean things like not saluting, disobeying an order to get a haircut etc.

It was considered unlikely that such offences would be PNC recorded and that when it came to disclosure discretion by DBS (or whatever body checks these days) guidance was in place to disregard, but then again the ex-RAF bloke found out the hard way this doesn't always happen.

So for all of those who tapped the boards for telling someone further up the food chain to do one with accompanying expletives then expect the unexpected.

This may be why they introduced s.11 (2), which allows the difference. This subsection allows for insubordination etc, s.11 (1) is for direct violence, which is a different matter.
As with a lot of these things, the introduction of the JSP MSL both simplified some things (COs of joint units, for example), but shifted the sand in others.
In this case, RN discipline was always a bit more severe, I was led to believe. So if you were abusive to a CPO at action stations and endangered a warship, you would have the book thrown at you. Not far off mutiny.
RAF: not pumping up the tyres of a plane when told to meant you had issues, resulting a welfare chat.
Army: telling a Sgt to f*** off when ordered to do up your chinstrap would lead to a punch in the face, or an unpleasant chat with the SSM.

LE

This may be why they introduced s.11 (2), which allows the difference. This subsection allows for insubordination etc, s.11 (1) is for direct violence, which is a different matter.
As with a lot of these things, the introduction of the JSP MSL both simplified some things (COs of joint units, for example), but shifted the sand in others.
In this case, RN discipline was always a bit more severe, I was led to believe. So if you were abusive to a CPO at action stations and endangered a warship, you would have the book thrown at you. Not far off mutiny.
RAF: not pumping up the tyres of a plane when told to meant you had issues, resulting a welfare chat.
Army: telling a Sgt to f*** off when ordered to do up your chinstrap would lead to a punch in the face, or an unpleasant chat with the SSM.

LE

I think this should be better advertised within the military.
RMP are, when it comes policing, part of the ‘family‘ of law enforcement agencies. So, all U.K. Home Office forces, British Transport Police and MOD Police for starters. Then you have the RSPCA, Border Force, Royal Mail, slight oddities like Port of Dover Police, Mersey Tunnels, and somewhere in there is the Service Police (all three now for 15+ years).
The lead for Service Police is the Provost Marshal, who is part of the Chief Constables ‘club’ for better words. So they access, update and use all the services the above do. Which includes PNC entries, ViSOR, etc., with other databases as required.
Access and use of these is overseen by the Home Office so no one goes mad and starts making their own rules up about what goes on and what don’t.

LE

Being "Put on report" is correct and not just for Woodentops. ORs can't charge soldiers, but report them to the authorities usually officers, who can actually frame the charge. The theory is this is where the "petty" stuff is weeded, but you and I know that that just ain't the case!

When you were tabbed in on a charge, i.e. walking in God's grass, why did you salute, you would have been hat and beltless when awaiting the "Award". Why hatless and beltless? - to stop the soldier assaulting the officer in the days when headdress and belts were substantial bits of kit.

Still the same under the AF06 act. The CO remains at the heart of the process.
For the army, they will inevitably discuss this with Bde legal before forming a charge. RN and RAF have similar procedures.
It also works the other way as all SH cases have to be reported back up. All three services have an overseeing body that reviews all SH cases.
Appeals to SH cases (against both finding and/or punishment) can, and often are, brought by these bodies on behalf of the soldier.
Just in case the CO goes mad and sentences the sergeant in front of him to be busted to private and go to MCTC for a year.
All sentences laid out in MSL, but COs go a bit mad from time to time.
And having the guilty bastard, sorry potential offender, marched in hat off, belt off is seen as wrong also these days, I’m afraid.
Appeals have been allowed, and won, on the unequal treatment of the soldier in front of the SH, eg being dressed differently etc.
RSM briefs them before that some shouting will happen, marching, barking of orders, what is to expected - OK.
Massive beasting in No 2 dress, yelling “have you packed your MCTC kit?”, being told your boots are not good enough AGAIN - not OK.

ADC

I was also advised that as the individual holding the orders should ensure that their desk was clear, of any objects at all, again to ensure no weapons were available to the accused.

I also believe that if you have the responsibility of judging someone you should be doing just that, no extraneous objects/files/pictures of your family etc should distract you from your duty. The accused should see that you are taking the process seriously as the outcome of the proceedings is going to have most affect upon them.

LE

Being "Put on report" is correct and not just for Woodentops. ORs can't charge soldiers, but report them to the authorities usually officers, who can actually frame the charge. The theory is this is where the "petty" stuff is weeded, but you and I know that that just ain't the case!

When you were tabbed in on a charge, i.e. walking in God's grass, why did you salute, you would have been hat and beltless when awaiting the "Award". Why hatless and beltless? - to stop the soldier assaulting the officer in the days when headdress and belts were substantial bits of kit.

LE

This may be why they introduced s.11 (2), which allows the difference. This subsection allows for insubordination etc, s.11 (1) is for direct violence, which is a different matter.
As with a lot of these things, the introduction of the JSP MSL both simplified some things (COs of joint units, for example), but shifted the sand in others.
In this case, RN discipline was always a bit more severe, I was led to believe. So if you were abusive to a CPO at action stations and endangered a warship, you would have the book thrown at you. Not far off mutiny.
RAF: not pumping up the tyres of a plane when told to meant you had issues, resulting a welfare chat.
Army: telling a Sgt to f*** off when ordered to do up your chinstrap would lead to a punch in the face, or an unpleasant chat with the SSM.

Tyre pumping would have been a tech charge, career destroying but leaving the airman still able to work.
i know of a lad (years back) who got pegged, and fucked over, shift pattern was days and nights checked equipment at 0745 all ok as he's staying on to cover manning he signs the 1645 checks as ok, but it had been letting by water by leaking value all day so pegged, career fucked, the real bad taste is that the same kit at weekends was a 24 hour duty shift with only the 0745 vheck

LE

OC to Pl Comd: “I say Julian old chap, next time you see Pte Cam_Ron, tell him to bally well stay out of the women’s block will you? Damned strange creatures are constantly complaining to Major Dikeminge about him spying on them in the showers and she is forever bending my ear about him. It really must stop, what?”

Pl Comd: “yikes sir, yes sir, I'll get straight onto it”

Later:

Pl Comd: to Pte Cam_Ron: “Pte Cam_Ron, no no, stand at ease man, just a word to the wise if I may... Major Knobnose says to stay out of the Lesbian’s Lair because he is jolly well fed up with their constant whining about you spying on them in the shower.”